Their reason to remove AP is absolute trash

What made INS Source really good is its lethality. every single bullet shot is extremely threatening and dangerous. Now Sandstorm is basically a CoD clone where everyone is running around frantically because its takes too long to die.

The choice of AP ammo also made the player make very hard decisions when customizing.

Should I remove AP for a 7x scope? Should i take AP, but without an extended magazine? Should i take AP, but no grenades? Remove my heavy armor for AP ammo?...etc.

It made the player think about sacrificing power for more strategic options. Now you can basically add a thousand attachments and customization options, and you'd still have points to spare.

This game is losing its way.

last edited by mohdak

@mohdak said in Their reason to remove AP is absolute trash:

...where everyone is running around frantically because its takes too long to die.

Everyone is running around frantically because of movement mechanics.

Preparing myself for some copy-paste action!

Have you read the reason? AP was so good above everything else that it's no point to have it as a "select option". It was a "no option" because if you did not pick it you must have been stupid. Personally I think the same applies currently to heavy armor.

That does not mean that guns should not have more punch in general.

@mefirst You have no idea what you are talking about. As a sniper, i always make a hard decision if i should take the 7x scope or the AP ammo. Grenades or AP ammo. Heavy armor or AP ammo..etc.

What you said make no sense at all. Part of the fun experience was making tough decisions about sacrificing gun power for other tactical options, before going into battle.

last edited by mohdak

@mohdak said in Their reason to remove AP is absolute trash:

@mefirst You have no idea what you are talking about. As a sniper, i always make a hard decision if i should take the 7x scope or the AP ammo. Grenades or AP ammo. Heavy armor or AP ammo..etc.

What you said make no sense at all. Part of the fun experience was making tough tactical decisions about gun sacrificing power for other tactical options, before going into battle.

Yes, as a sniper you didn’t always need AP, since your gun generally already packed a punch. Pretty much anything else with the possible exception of MGs and pistols and you needed AP ammo.

Reminder that in Insurgency2014 a rifle with no AP ammo could 1 shot an unarmored enemy
Reminder that in Sandstorm a rifle (with no AP ammo) can not 1 shot an unarmored enemy

Disregarding both AP and armor their core gameplay has changed for the worse.

In Insurgency2(source), I often sacrifice AP for suppressors/explosives/scopes.
I don't care about removing AP from Sandstorm, but I can't understand their reason.
They said AP rounds are too powerful, players always use AP rounds(not true).
They can simple adjust the power of AP rounds or make them more expensive, so players won't always use AP rounds.
When there are more than 1 ways to balance AP rounds, their reason is not logical.

Another problem for me is that they used the same reason to remove drum magazines from PVP.
I think they should limit drum magazines available to featureless classes, not remove them entirely from PVP.

last edited by s925033

Yes, I loved when I was basically always required to sacrifice 3 supply points or lose every 1v1 gunfight I got into.

Whatever. NWI has already nerfed armor to complete uselessness, so I'm sure you'll get your way eventually. They have absolutely no spine when it comes to dealing with feedback.

Go ahead. Call me a filthy casual / COD player / whatever. I don't care. I'm sick and tired of this discussion.

@mohdak said in Their reason to remove AP is absolute trash:

What made INS Source really good is its lethality.

The choice of AP ammo

This game is losing its way.

Allow me to speak for myself when I say that every gun oneshotting isnt why insurgency was popular. I dont think AP ammo was a choice either. Its technically a choice but the choice is deciding between enjoying an icecream or drowning yourself, its a no-brainer.

I think the game found its way, at least in this specific context. Theres things I dont agree with but the damage isnt one of them.

@slazenger it wasn't. 2.5k avg. peak player count over it's life span. That's not popular.

Don't need another ttk thread ... tons of people have already made arguments here:
https://forums.focus-home.com/topic/30434/ttk-needs-a-kick-up-the/141

@slazenger said in Their reason to remove AP is absolute trash:

in Sandstorm a rifle (with no AP ammo) can not 1 shot an unarmored enemy

I don't think this is how it should work. I agree that an unarmored target should get one shot by basically every rifle round. Still doesn't change my armor argument.

Besides, AP ammo still exists ... an MP7 is chambered for special AP rounds. Want AP? Go pick up the MP7 as breacher.

last edited by thehappybub

@benz
That’s pretty popular for an indie game. Insurgency came in second for the Indie of the Year award in 2014. For reference, 1334 games were released on steam that year. Insurgency sold over 5 million copies, the median copies owned for games released in 2014 is 44,000.

Those are monumental results for an indie developer.

On topic though, I don’t have much issue with AP being removed as an option. It’s one less variable NW has to consider when trying to balance damage.

last edited by EyeofHorus

There's built-in penetration so it didnt changed anything.You know,AP is a part of a normal weapon.

Since AP ammo was a must-pick, I don't see the problem in removing the option to pay points for AP ammo. But please, model Sandstorm's damage after Insurgency 2's actual damage model instead of the non-AP damage model nobody used.

@l1ttel_y said in Their reason to remove AP is absolute trash:

There's built-in penetration so it didnt changed anything.You know,AP is a part of a normal weapon.

This right here.

No AP ammo needed. Weapons have penetration values that can be adjusted to balance weapons.

How lethal the game is has been a selling point for 12 years or something iirc. I don't think insurgency are that many tweaks away from a generic shooter with 0 players. We have quite many players though, especially if you compare to similar studios have in their games. I honestly believe we have to credit the TTK to some degree for that. That doesn't mean TTK should be lowered. In my impression, it is still lower than most games?

@snuffeldjuret said in Their reason to remove AP is absolute trash:

That doesn't mean TTK should be lowered

As long as it doesn't I'm good lmao.

@snuffeldjuret said in Their reason to remove AP is absolute trash:

I don't think insurgency are that many tweaks away from a generic shooter with 0 players.

But it's also just a few tweaks away from being absolutely GOLDEN. It's a fine line I suppose. Depends on what is tweaked and how, obviously 🙂

That doesn't mean TTK should be lowered. In my impression, it is still lower than most games?

Yes, it is lower.

last edited by jensiii

Looks like your connection to Focus Home Interactive - Official Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.